Respect max message size property fo Quarkus GRPC client (44853)

[alex-pumpkin]

Fixes #44853 and gives a workaround for #44852

[cescoffier]

Thanks!

[cescoffier]

Can you check the formatting?

[alex-pumpkin]

Sure. The imports are sorted now.

[cescoffier]

Can you squash your commits?

[alex-pumpkin]

Done

[geoand]

@cescoffier should this be backported?

[alex-pumpkin]

Sorry, I have synchronized it with the main branch wrong. Should I reopen with clean branch and commits?

[geoand]

You can just rebase your branch onto main and then force push

[alex-pumpkin]

Great, thanks. Never used force push before :)

[geoand]

It's perfectly fine to do that on your own branches (that are not being worked by others)

[quarkus-bot]

Status for workflow Quarkus Documentation CI

This is the status report for running Quarkus Documentation CI on commit 48dc90c.

✅ The latest workflow run for the pull request has completed successfully.

It should be safe to merge provided you have a look at the other checks in the summary.

Warning

There are other workflow runs running, you probably need to wait for their status before merging.

[github-actions]

🎊 PR Preview c10465e has been successfully built and deployed to https://quarkus-pr-main-44855-preview.surge.sh/version/main/guides/

• Images of blog posts older than 3 months are not available.
• Newsletters older than 3 months are not available.

[quarkus-bot]

Status for workflow Quarkus CI

This is the status report for running Quarkus CI on commit b26c421.

✅ The latest workflow run for the pull request has completed successfully.

It should be safe to merge provided you have a look at the other checks in the summary.

You can consult the Develocity build scans.

[cescoffier]

If it backports cleanly yes.

[gsmet]

I tried to backport it to 3.17 and I have the following test failure:

The issue can be seen in this (now probably hidden) issue: #44897 (comment) .

@cescoffier any clue?

[cescoffier]

@gsmet Nope, I don't why this PR could change this test. (@alesj any idea).

BTW, due to the last comment on #44852, I don't believe we should backport. We need to understand the behavior difference between gRPC java and the Vert.x gRPC first. (removing the label, sorry about that).

[alesj]

(@alesj any idea).

Uh, no idea, since this change looks trivial / simple.